AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned counsel for respondent no. 2. The counsel who represented the deceased respondent no. 1
is also present. As per averments in the broadcasting petition, petitioner is an Multi System Operator (MSO), respondent no. 1 is an Local Cable
Operator (LCO) and respondent no. 2 is a competing MSO to whom respondent no. 1 was allegedly migrating by swapping the STBs of the
petitioner. In several cases this Tribunal has held in similar facts that respondent no. 2 is not a necessary or proper party and can be deleted. So
far as the necessary party respondent no. 1 is concerned, there is no dispute that the owner of Namrata Enterprises, Bal Krishna Ram Chandra
Chavan is no more and in support of this fact learned counsel for respondent no. 1 has shared the death certificate.
After receiving information of death of owner of respondent no. 1, petitioner sought time to ascertain the facts and bring on record his heirs, if
available. Since receipt of the aforesaid information on 4.3.2021, petitioner has made efforts and was granted opportunities but today learned
counsel submits on instructions that petitioner has not been able to find out any heirs of deceased owner of respondent no. 1 against whom
petitioner may pursue its claims.
In view of aforesaid facts, the petition has to be dismissed because it cannot proceed against the deceased owner of respondent no.1. The petition
is disposed of on that basis along with M.A.(S), if any.Â